Institute for

Research: Middle East Foreign Policy

Middle Eastern Policy Brief
Policy, Inc. March 27, 2003

Clean Break or Dirty War?

Israel’s Foreign Policy Directive to the United States
Executive Summary
Great changes are seldom achieved without a plan. The Israeli policy paper “A Clean Break: A
New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (ACB) was authored by a group of policy advisors to
Israel. Subsequently, nearly all members ascended to influential policy making positions within
U.S. government, media, and academic circles. Many of the ACB policies such as toppling the
government of Iraq are now in full implementation and present new challenges to the global
community. Others, such as the reform of Israel’s economy have been abysmal failures, but
generate little visibility or impact outside of Israel. (See Exhibit 1)

Exhibit #1
“Clean Break” Policy Implementation Score Card through March, 2003
(IRMEP 2003)

Increase U.S. Congressional

Support

“ Peace for Peace” Palestin-

ian Strategy

Contain, Destabilize and Roll

Back Regional Challengers

Domestic Economic Reform

Rejuvenation of Zionism

0 1 2 3 4 5
Implementation Points (1 = Very Low, 5 = Very High)

This paper provides an overview of the policy implementation of “A Clean Break: A New Strategy
for Securing the Realm”. (http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm) Some of the events and
trends that contribute to success or failure of the plan predate ACB by many years. And
although many ACB authors ascended to new heights of political power in the U.S., the success
or failure of the policies cannot be solely ascribed to them. However, ACB policies are, for the
most part, extremely damaging to U.S. interests. The ACB framework is useful for explaining
the motives driving the complete failure of U.S. interests in the Middle East and the triumph of
politics and lobbies over statecraft.

The Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy Research (IRMEP) Policy Brief is published for the sole use of IRMEP members and the foreign policy
community. It may not be duplicated, reproduced, or retransmitted in whole or in part without the express permission of the IRMEP, http://www.irmep.org
Phone (786) 295-4296, Fax (202)318-8009. The IRMEP can be reached by e-mail at: info@irmep.org. For more information, contact the IRMEP. All rights
reserved.
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

Table of Contents
Clean Break or Dirty War? Israel’s Foreign Policy Directive to the United
States Executive Summary ............................................................................... 1

I. Securing the Realm: Background .............................................................................. 2

II. ACB Implementation Assessment............................................................................. 6
a. Increase Support in the U.S. Congress ......................................................... 6
b. “Peace for Peace” Approach to the Palestinian Question .......................... 9
c. Contain, Destabilize and Roll Back Regional Challengers........................ 10
d. Economic Reform ......................................................................................... 12
e. Rejuvenation of Zionism............................................................................... 13
III. ACB American Interest Damage Assessment ....................................................... 15
a. Increase U.S. Congressional Support ......................................................... 15
b. “Peace for Peace” Palestinian Strategy...................................................... 16
c. Contain, Destabilize, and Roll Back Regional Challengers....................... 16
d. Economic Reform ......................................................................................... 17
e. Rejuvenation of Zionism............................................................................... 17
IV. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 19
Further Reading ............................................................................................................ 19

I. Securing the Realm: Background

“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (ACB) contains six pages of
policy recommendations for Benjamin Netanyahu. In 1996 Israel’s newly elected Prime
Minister relied upon opinion makers, thinkers and researchers to craft the paper. This
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli
Strategy Toward 2000" included Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks,
Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser.

The paper’s call for a “break” from failed policies of the past such as “land for peace” and
a new concentration on the realities of “balance of power” in the region are striking for
their realpolitik approaches and high dependence on actions and resources of the U.S.
government.

2
Exhibit #2
ACB Policy Initiatives
(Source: IRMEP 2003)

Increase U.S. “Electrify and find support” of key U.S. congressional members
Congressional Support
Strategic cooperation with U.S. on missile defense
Gain more support among members of Congress with little knowledge of Israel
Harness support to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv
Identify Israel with the U.S. and “western values”
Utilize Cold War rhetoric to make Israel’s case to the American people
“Peace for Peace” Eliminate movements toward a “comprehensive peace” and substitute with the “Peace for Peace”
Palestinian Solution strategy
Stress “balance of power” as sole test of legitimacy, enforce agreements
Nurture alternatives to Arafat
Seek legitimization of “hot pursuit” of Palestinian militants
Eliminate “land for peace” concept, use negotiations only as a forum for communicating resolve
Establish a joint monitoring committee with the U.S. for measuring Palestinian compliance
Withhold U.S. aid to Palestinians
Promote Human Rights among Arabs to isolate Palestinians in Arab Constituencies
Legitimize 2000 year old historical land claim
Foment Arab recognition of Israel in exchange for peace
Contain, Destabilize, and Challenge Arab countries as “police states” lacking in legitimacy.
Roll Back Regional
Challengers
Fortify regional alliances. Work with Turkey and Jordan to insert hostile Arab tribes into Syria
Syria Publicly question Syrian legitimacy, assume treaties with Damascus are in bad faith
Contain Syria, strike select targets
Reject “land for peace” concept on the Golan Heights
Iraq Install a Hashemite monarchy in Iraq
Isolate and surround Syria with a friendly regime in Iraq
Lebanon Engage Syria, Iran and Iraq in Lebanon
“Wean” Lebanese Shiites from Iraq toward Jordan
Economic Reform Eliminate Social Zionism from the economy.
Reform the overall economy, cut taxes
Show maturity and economic self reliance from the United States
Eliminate need for defense by U.S. military forces
Remove U.S. aid leverage over Israel
Relegislate a free trade zone, sell off public lands and enterprises
Zionism Rebuild Zionism, rejuvenate the national ideal
“Shape the regional environment” in favor of Israel, “transcend foes” rather than contain them
Pre-emption as the preferred national defense strategy

3
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

Although ACB readers can identify nearly 34 distinct and actionable goals eloquently
stated within the document, they may be summarized in five overarching policy goals:

1. Increase U.S. Congressional Support

2. “Peace for Peace” Palestinian Strategy
3. Contain, Destabilize, and Roll Back Regional Challengers
4. Economic Reform
5. Rejuvenation of Zionism

In this paper, we evaluate the level of implementation of these five summary goals, and
their effect on the interests of the United States. However, no set of policies ever
come to fruition without an active and vocal distribution and implementation
network. ACB’s legions of American shock troops are many. At its core, key
operatives working within the Bush Administration (called the Neocons), policy research
“think tanks”, specialty press, and opinion columns have achieved amazing success at
seasoning and baking ACB policy agenda items into a tenuous mold as “vital interests”
of the United States itself. (See Exhibit 3)
The need for “crime scene” levels of evidence linking ACB followers’ complicity in
the actions of the U.S. Government at Israel’s behest is unnecessary. Many U.S.
actions are simply so inexplicable that consideration of their chief benefactor,
Israel, is the only reasonable explanation. And as Americans dismiss Arab
government charges that Israel is attacking them by proxy across the region, the
evidence shows that the Arabs are correct. “A Clean Break” is, at heart, an Israeli
proclamation of “Dirty War”.

4
Exhibit #3
The Neocon Policy Distribution and Implementation Network
(Source: IRMEP 2003)

Groups Messages Medium Members

Defense Preemption/ Think-Tanks Paul Wolfowitz
Cabal Remaking the Defense Richard Perle
Middle East Policy Board Douglas Feith
Defense Elliot Abrams
Aid for Israel/Joint
Department David Wurmser
Weapons
Defense
Development
contractors
New Homeland Talk Shows
Security Business Investment
Opportunities Banks
Legitimization of
Israeli occupation of
Palestinian
territories
Neocon Specialty Press Danger of Islam American David Brooks
Enterprise Lawrence Kaplan
Illegitimacy of all
Institute, William Kristol
Arab governments
JINSA, and Norman Podhoretz
Illegitimacy of “land Heritage
for peace” initiatives Foundation
Reports
Primacy of the The Weekly
defense of Israel
Standard
The New
Republic
Commentary
(American
Jewish
Committee)
Columnists Palestinian militants Wall Street Robert Kagan
as “terrorists” Journal Charles
New York Krauthammer
Linkage between
Times Max Boot
9/11 and all Arab
Washington William Safire
governments
Post editorial
Israelis as “heroes” pages
Critics of Israel as
“anti-Semites”

Core members of the group have been able to raise the primacy of Israeli issues to a
level that Americans would find absurd if the group were promoting the interests of any
other state, (such as Italy or Mexico). Their level of vitriol, hubris and war-mongering by

5
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

power of the pen and influence over American policy has been stunning. Many have
personally engaged in activities that derailed official U.S. foreign policy initiatives
in the interest of improving Israel’s power. Others have systematically chipped
away at the U.S. constitution by supplanting Israeli interests for legitimate U.S.
interests in the Defense Department and Executive branch of the U.S. government.
The gaping divide that separates this group’s lobbying on behalf of Israel and the
true interests of the United States also defines this group with the very label they
so frequently hurl at others: traitors to the United States of America.

II. ACB Implementation Assessment

The level of implementation of ACB policy objectives is not uniform. Nor are the
resources, Israeli and American, which have been rallied and deployed in their support.
In this section, we consider the level of implementation success of each ACB policy
summary.

a. Increase Support in the U.S. Congress

It is political suicide for a member of the U.S. Congress to strongly oppose policy
positions of Zionist lobbies operating in the United States. Former president George W.
W. Bush put it best when he declared that opposing the Zionist lobby in favor of a
Palestinian State was the right thing to do, but came “at a hell of price. “
The defining demonstration of this power predates ACB. The lobby converted its most
powerful aid opponent by rallying massive campaign contributions to defeat North
Carolina senator Jesse Helms. Pro-Israel political action committees poured an awe
inspiring $222,342 into the campaign of Helms' opponent, North Carolina Governor
James Hunt. Hunt's campaign secretary proclaimed that "Senator Helms has the worst
anti-Israel record in the United States Senate and supporters of Israel throughout the
country know it."

After the scare of almost losing reelection, Helms announced that he would exempt from
cuts the more than one-third of total U.S. foreign aid going to Israel since such aid was
"in the strategic interest of the U.S." He also became an ardent and comical supporter of
moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and worked diligently to increase
the appropriations for Israel from the Defense Department, the State Department and
half a dozen other different federal agency budgets.
A survey of recently introduced legislation indicates that Congress is repaying the
debt to Israel by internalizing Israel’s conflicts and putting U.S. resources at
Israel’s disposal. (See Exhibit 4)

6
Exhibit #4
Recent Pro-Israel Legislation Introduced in the U.S. Congress
(Source: Library of Congress and IRMEP 2003)

Legislation Summary Analysis

Koby Mandell Act To create an office within the Department of
Justice to undertake specific steps to ensure that
of 2003 all American citizens harmed by terrorism
overseas receive equal treatment by the United
States government regardless of the terrorists'
country of origin or residence, and to ensure that
all terrorists involved in such attacks are pursued,
prosecuted, and punished with equal vigor,
regardless of the terrorists' country of origin or
residence.
Demonize the Palestinian Authority by
labeling dual citizen Israeli deaths in the
ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict as
“acts of terrorism” that the U.S.
Department of Justice can pursue.
Understandably, the legislation does
not address the summary arrest and
torture of Arab American citizens by the
Israeli Shin-Bet

Whereas the United Commends the people of Israel for conducting Seeks to coerce the Palestinian
free and fair elections, reaffirming the friendship leadership to censor official media in
States and Israel between the Governments and peoples of the opposition to Israel and take
are close allies United States and Israel, and for other purposes. responsibility for the security of Israel
whose people by controlling many radical groups
share a deep and essentially beyond its control.
abiding friendship
based on a shared
commitment to
democratic values
H.RES.61
HR 167 IH To take certain steps toward recognition by the Seeks to create another set of “facts on
United States of Jerusalem as the capital of the ground” by eliminating resistance to
Israel. moving U.S. diplomatic facilities to the
contested city of Jerusalem from Tel
Aviv. Also seeks recognition of births in
Jerusalem as being births in Israel and
identification in all U.S. government
documents of Jerusalem as the capital
in spite of international opposition to
legitimizing the issue.

International Seeks to monitor all international curriculums for Would codify McCarthy type
“Anti-Semitic” material and tie U.S. aid to official independent monitoring groups tied to
School Curriculum U.S. approval of such educational material. Zionist organizations such as Daniel
Monitoring Act Pipe’s infamous "Campus Watch”.
(Introduced in Legitimizes yet another lever for Israeli
House) HR 1358 IH operatives to influence and deny aid to
countries that legitimately oppose
Israel.

Senator Lindsey Expresses the sense of Congress regarding the Seeks to solidify 1967 borders and
protection of religious sites and the freedom of Israeli occupied territories by putting
Graham and access and worship" in the state of Israel and their religious sites under
Congressman Joe “nearby territories”. The resolution states that the Congressionally legitimized protection
Wilson Resolution holy sites currently under the sovereignty of the mirroring Israel's "Israeli Protection of
to protect and open state of Israel should remain under Israeli Holy Places Law of 1967" which states
protection and that all holy sites in the region that freedom of access and worship is
up all holy sites in remain open to visitors of all faiths". ensured at all places of worship and
the state of Israel religious significance."
and nearby
territory SCON 32
IS

7
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

Other than the repetitious and almost desperate rhetoric about the unity of vision
and purpose between the U.S. and Israel, and fawning approval of all things
Israeli, another common strand runs through this legislation. None of it would be
introduced by Congress members preoccupied exclusively with promoting U.S.
interests. Most of the legislation is costly to the United States in constraining
American civil liberties and foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East while
legitimizing even the most despicable Israeli actions much of the rest of the world
community and U.N. consider to be crimes. The gestures create enmity with
nations and states with which the U.S. should have steadily improving
relationships. As an ACB policy goal, IRMEP applies a score of “5 out of 5” to
demonstrated Israeli influence over the U.S. Congress.

8
b. “Peace for Peace” Approach to the Palestinian Question

Israel has adopted all of the appearances of promoting a “peace for peace”
strategy with the Palestinians. Under this policy, Palestinians have no land
claims on territory within the borders of Israel or territory occupied by Israel.
Palestinians and future enemies under this policy must be content only with
avoiding their own destruction by Israel.

One aggressive approach promoted by Richard Perle, former chairman of the U.S.
Defense Policy Board labels Jordan as Palestine, implying relocation or “ethnic
cleansing” of Palestinian peoples. “Land for Peace” as a strategy is widely discredited
by pro-Israel agents as being unworkable and lacking in security for Israel. Current
efforts to derail remnants of “Land for Peace” include:

1. Israeli Security Time Limits On March 31, 2003, Israeli foreign Minister Silvan
Shalom indicated that Israel will only give the Palestinian prime minister
designate two months to crack down on terrorism. By placing the prime minister
in charge of Israeli security against forces entirely outside his circle of influence,
Israel creates ideal conditions for rejecting land for peace movements while
accelerating settlement activity.

2. Legitimizing Israeli Delays through Amendments to the Roadmap The

roadmap for peace proposed by the European Union, Russia, the United
Nations and United States was originally designed to be non-negotiable for both
Israel and Palestine. Intense lobbying pressure has produced cracks that open
the possibility for endless Israeli negotiations and delays of the roadmap as
Israel proposes 12 major changes to this seven page document. On March 14,
2003, President Bush gave Israel license to pursue the amendment strategy in a
Rose Garden announcement. “The United States has developed this plan over
the last several months in close cooperation with Russia, the European Union,
and the United Nations. Once this road map is delivered, we will expect and
welcome contributions from Israel and the Palestinians to this document that will
advance true peace.”

3. Discrediting Roadmap Architects Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and network

members have worked diligently to discredit roadmap architects, particularly
European nations. While Israel was unsuccessful in blocking some conferences
and Palestinian contributions to the roadmap, the current political climate in the
U.S. after traditional allies and the U.N. failed to support the U.S. invasion of Iraq
has boosted Israel’s chances of creating schisms in the quartet.

Because Israel has not yet been able to completely derail the roadmap, IRMEP
assigns a score of only “3 out of 5” for promotion of the “peace for peace”
strategy.

9
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

c. Contain, Destabilize and Roll Back Regional Challengers

The U.S. invasion of Iraq is such a singular success for Israel that pro-Israel leaders and
pundits in the United States have had to restrain their glee that a long and arduous effort
to topple Iraq’s government and neutralize the state has finally borne fruit.
Although Iraq is only one challenger to Israel, an accelerated Israeli effort to discredit,
disrupt, and undermine other Arab governments, many in the midst of democratic
reform, is moving forward rapidly.

10
Exhibit #5
“Clean Break” Containment and Destabilization Policy Implementation
(IRMEP 2003)
Target Tactic
Syria Threats of Invasion In secretary of State
Colin Powell’s speech to a conference of
AIPAC members, he spoke of the “critical
choice” facing Damascus. “Syria can
continue to direct support for terrorist
groups and the dying regime of Saddam
Hussein, or it can embark on a different and
more hopeful course. Either way, Syria
bears the responsibility for its choices, and
the consequences,” he declared to loud
applause.
Syria Simmering Conflict Violence in and around
Golan Heights has flared. Hezbollah
guerrillas on the border zone, who have
been fighting to force the Israelis to
withdraw, have killed seven Israeli soldiers.
Iran Linking Free-Lancers to Iran Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld accused hundreds of
Iraqi Shiite militia fighters based in Iran
have crossed back into Iraq, complicating
the military mission for the US-led coalition
seeking to oust Iraqi leader Saddam
Hussein. He has rushed to classify them as
“combatants” even though the forces could
be channeled onto the American side.
Undersecretary of State John Bolton, a
leading hawk, was quoted last month as
telling Israeli officials that Iran would be
"dealt with" after the war with Iraq.
Saudi Smearing and Defame Former Defense
Arabia Policy board Chairman Richard Perle
spearheaded an intense smear campaign
against Saudi Arabia at the Pentagon,
laying the foundations for future U.S.
military action.
Egypt Conditioning and Cutting Foreign Aid
Condition aid to Egypt on increased support
for Israel
Result
The redirection of U.S. forces to Syria
after toppling Saddam Hussein is a high
priority for Israel. An increase in
allegations of Syrian transshipments of
war materiel, and use as an entry point for
regional Muslims answering a call for
Jihad could quickly be aggrandized into
support for use of force by the massive
U.S. military force already in the region.
Israel responded with air strikes that
destroyed three Lebanese power stations
and injured 20 civilians. Israel has
continued its campaign to label all
branches of Hezbollah as terrorists.
By immediately rejecting the possibility of
Shiite militia as allies and moving quickly
implicate the government of Iran for what
are probably freelance operatives, the
Bush administration advances another
step down the ACB regional challenger
path. Although the UK has rejected any
support for Syrian and Iranian fronts, the
mass of U.S. forces could be immediately
redeployed to attack Iran.
Perle contracted Rand Corporation
analyst Laurent Muraweic on July 10,
2002. Rand’s briefing declared Saudi
Arabia an “enemy of the United States”
and advocated that the US invade the
country, seize its oil fields and confiscate
its financial assets unless the Saudis
“stop supporting the anti-Western terror
network.”
Legislation to engage in social
engineering in Egypt by tying U.S. foreign
aid to rewriting curriculum to proselytize a
better image of Israel. Media watch
campaigns and scoring are also
conditions of aid.
11
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

IRMEP assigns an overall score of “4” to Israeli efforts to destabilize and roll back
regional rivals. While large successes have been scored in Iraq and Saudi Arabia,
it is not yet clear that Israel will be able to motivate the U.S. into armed conflict
with Syria and Iran. Also, it is increasingly apparent that Arab nations are “on to”
the architects of Middle Eastern conflict, and strategizing to both expose and
resist ACB proxy activities.

d. Economic Reform

Israel’s efforts at economic reform have not yielded positive results. Although ACB calls
for increased economic independence from the U.S. which would allow freer reign for
Israeli policies the U.S. directly opposes, efforts at reform have been too little, too late.
Israel has mismanaged its economy and continues to export the negative
consequences to the United States.

1. Israeli Economic Mismanagement Hitting 103% of GDP in 2002, Israel

maintains one of the highest government debt ratios in the world; a higher debt
ratio to GDP than most OECD countries, surpassing Canada. The Bank of Israel
predicts the ratio will balloon to at least 106% in 2003. Interest payments on the
government debt, under international standards, amount to 8.1% of GDP, while
the OECD average is 2.2%. This is unfavorable compared with 3.1% in
Germany, 2.8% in France, 2% in the US, and 1.2% in Japan. The Bank of Israel
believes that this continued and uncontrolled increase in interest payments on
the government debt will reduce the government’s ability to maintain
infrastructure investments and social needs or freely set budget priorities. These
interest payments on the government debt increased to NIS 39.5 billion in 2002,
a fifth of the state budget. Economic mismanagement has caused the harshest
recession in the country’s 55-year history and two years of negative growth.
Israel's gross domestic product dropped 1.1 percent in 2002 with unemployment
at an average of 10.3 percent. The government ran up a $579 million budget
deficit in February, the highest 30-day overdraft on record.

2. Eliminate Social Zionism The kibbutz movement in Israel is symbolic of social

Zionism, and it is in crisis. Only limited kibbutzim in Israel, between 35 and 50,
are doing well, or in some cases prospering. Though 2 percent of Israel's 6.2
million people live on kibbutzim; they generate 40 percent of the nation's
agricultural produce and 10 percent of its industrial output. As Israel’s youth flee
the kibbutzim, the average age of members have spiraled. Communal financial
capabilities for covering retirement and healthcare benefits are on life support as
Israelis came to realize the fundamental flaw in social Zionism. As one
immigrant stated, "Our basic premise was wrong," "The basic idea was that if we
bring up our children in a non-competitive society, they would naturally want to
live that way. . . . That was a big mistake."

12
 3. Over Development/Reliance on High Tech During the tech boom, Israel over-
developed its high tech sector. Investments were made in spite of a general lack
of a supporting community of universities and high tech educational facilities and
domestic technology demand. Israel counted on being able to leverage
preferential access to the U.S. market for military and software products without
taking into consideration the high competition with U.S. and other global firms.
The dramatic collapse of the Israeli high tech sector also revealed the
disproportionate effect over- reliance on a volatile sector can have on a small
country as opposed to larger economies in Europe and the United States that
have more successfully weathered the storm.

IRMEP’s assessment of economic reform in Israel is that it is much too little, much
too late, leading to an ACB score of “1 out of 5”. Perhaps this can be attributed to
ACB’s architects. While most are highly capable in securing foreign aid and
political support for Israel, none were notable economists. The architects and
their network, of course, lay much of the blame for Israel’s economic malaise as
the effect of Palestinian resistance to occupation.

e. Rejuvenation of Zionism

Zionism, defined as the international movement for the establishment of a Jewish

national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel, is
enjoying resurgence, though from unexpected quarters:
1. American Christian Zionist Movement Support for Israel by organized
Christian groups in the U.S. has undergone explosive growth. Israel has been
promoted and accepted as a cause that represents concrete steps toward the
fulfillment of scriptural prophecy. One group, the two million member Christian
Coalition, is able to quickly deploy voting guides to over 70 million U.S.
households for such causes as the legislative effort to solidify Israel’s 1967
borders and occupied territories purely in the name of “protection of religious site
access”. The return of the Jews to their ancient homeland is seen by
Evangelicals as a precondition for the mystical Second Coming of Christ.
Therefore, when the Jewish state was created in 1948, evangelicals saw it as a
sign. Israel’s conquest of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1967 deepened their
excitement, and multiplied their organized support for Israel.

2. Weakened International Opposition to Zionism Twenty-six years ago, the

United Nations General Assembly adopted a contentious resolution equating
Zionism with racism. Then, as now, Israel mustered the support of the United
States (and few other states) to stand by Israel's rejection of the resolution.
Although conferences addressing the tie between Zionism and racism are again
questioning Israel and the high Palestinian casualties produced by endless
conflict, the U.S. has been instrumental in stifling debate through its conspicuous
absence at most human rights conferences.

13
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

3. More Effective Deployment of the “Anti-Semitism” Smear Attack Critics of

Israel in the major broadcast or print media are few in number. In 1919, Morris
Jastrow, Jr. wrote the book “Zionism and the Future of Palestine” published
by the Macmillan Company. Jastrow correctly predicted that the intertwining
of religion and nationality “political Zionism” would have negative
consequences. He posited that whereas non-Jews have only one country
and one purported loyalty “Americans are American”, the “French are
French”, etc., Jews are seen as having split loyalties. He believed that they
are both citizens of the country in which they live and also supporters of the
Jewish state. He worried that Jews living outside of Israel (occupied
Palestine) would be seen as being less than totally loyal to the country where
they reside. Right or wrong, Jastrow predicted that this political difference
adds to the real anti-Semitism that then existed. However, Jastrow failed to
predict how effectively smear campaigns would be deployed by Zionist entities
such as the Anti Defamation League when small numbers of agents of Israel
were actually caught engaging in “activities incompatible with their status as
American citizens.” The suggestion by Pat Buchanan and other deeply
conservative thinkers that “war party” members with undeniably compromising
ties to Israel were the primary architects of the U.S. invasion of Iraq have been
met with a stifling wall of charges of anti-Semitism and media rebukes.
However, though most potential critics of Israel in the mainstream media
continue to be effectively muzzled, the charges and evidence are beginning to
circulate beyond small groups of intellectuals and patriots.

One religion enjoys no protection. Across the dial of Christian Radio in Bible Belt
America, listeners can hear the shrill condemnations of Islam, and testimony to the
ascendancy and righteousness of Christian and Zionist principles, acting in alliance
against Islam.
High profile conferences feature sessions by intellectual ideologues such as Daniel
Pipes speaking about militant Islam and 15% of Muslims as potential terrorists while
Jerry Falwell proclaims that the prophet Mohammed himself was a terrorist. Countless
millions of Americans are reading a series of novels called “Left Behind.” They are
topping bestseller lists all over the country and being made into movies. These books
glorify and chronicle apocalyptic times. The setting is the twenty-first century, complete
with war planes and TV correspondents.
This Christian fervor for the advance of Israel gives pause to many Jewish
leaders. While these Christians believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jewish
people and that every grain of sand between the Dead Sea, the Jordan River, and the
Mediterranean Sea belongs to the Jews, including the West Bank and Gaza, problems
exist. The biblical version of the apocalypse either kills off Jews or has them converted
to Christianity, making evangelical support a double edge sword that is a poor guide for
real geopolitics played out in the Middle East on the ground. In the words of one clever
observer it “cuts us out in the fourth act”.

And what biblical guidance is there for the three million Palestinians who live on the
West Bank and Gaza? Some fundamentalists suggest the bulk of them should be
cleansed from this God-given real estate and moved to another Arab country. In fact,
many evangelicals believe that when Prime Minister Rabin signed the Oslo accords and

14
offered to trade land for peace, it was not only a mistake, it was a sin that he paid for
with his own life.

IRMEP assigns a score of “5” to the ACB plan to rejuvenate Zionism. The
effectiveness of the machinery in place to promote Zionism is awe inspiring
though coming from unexpected, and at times, wholly unwanted, quarters.

III. ACB American Interest Damage Assessment

ACB represents a plan for achieving the best possible outcome for Israel. However, the
policies that create a favorable outcome for Israel create an equal and opposite negative
effect for the United States. (See Exhibit 6). In this section, we analyze the extent of the
damage and assign it a numerical score.

Exhibit #6
U.S. Damage Assessment Scorecard: “Clean Break” Policy Implementation
(IRMEP 2003)

Increase U.S. Congressional

Support

“ Peace for Peace” Palestinian

Strategy

Contain, Destabilize and Roll Back

Regional Challengers

Domestic Economic Reform

Rejuvenation of Zionism

0 1 2 3 4 5
Damage to U.S. Interests (1=Very Low, 5 = Very HIgh)

a. Increase U.S. Congressional Support

A verifiable Israeli influence over the U.S. Congress, indirectly emanating from different
quarters of the body of interest groups and lobbying organizations, is tremendously
damaging for the United States. As ideologues promoting policies based on Israeli,
Zionist or even biblical objectives are effectively enforced by U.S. law and military might,
portions of the American ideal begin to wither, die and finally decay.

The first to go is the idea that, as a nation, the United States operates best as a
secular entity. The Bill of Rights states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion.” By accepting and exporting U.S. power in support of the aims

15
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

of two religions, Christianity and Judaism, Congress has violated the U.S. Constitution,
and itself.
Smaller acts, such as distributing communications to U.S. soldiers fighting in Muslim
lands exhorting that they “pray for President Bush” are further disturbing signs that the
United States separation of church and state has been eroded to the point of collapse.

IRMEP scores the increase in U.S. Congressional Support damage assessment

score at the very highest level, “5 out of 5”.

b. “Peace for Peace” Palestinian Strategy

The collapse of the Oslo Accords and degradation caused by the Israel Palestinian
conflict has left only one party that can effectively enforce solutions to the crisis. The
United States.
U.S interests in achieving peace in the region are of high importance. The conflict is
seen as the lynchpin of grievances throughout the Arab world. By siding with the
interests of Israel, and compromising its role as a neutral broker, the U.S. has
compromised its own legitimacy.
The chief U.S. interest in the Middle East is promoting a gradual and non-violent
political, social, and economic development of the entire region. Favoring only one
country makes conflict in vital oil producing regions more likely, motivates militant
fundamentalist terrorist networks to act against the U.S., and strains U.S. relations with
the global community.

IRMEP scores U.S. adherence to a “peace for peace” rather than “land for peace”
strategy as having a high (score of 4) level of damage to U.S. Middle East
Interests.

c. Contain, Destabilize, and Roll Back Regional Challengers

The Israeli motivated plan to “destabilize” and “redraw the map of the Middle East” may
be remembered by future generations as the spark that fell into the tinder box of World
War III. While the United States is clearly interested in the reform of governments and
institutions across the Middle East, a slower and more gradual approach with lower
amounts of bloodshed was clearly the preferable path.
By accelerating conflict and casting aside both international law and alliances in the
name of “regime change”, the U.S. is increasingly perceived as a rogue state and every
bit as much a U.N. pariah as Israel.
By picking fights with ethnicities and tribes about which it knows or chooses to know
comparatively little, the Bush Administration is only beginning to harvest the
consequences of ill-advised and ideologically motivated extremism.
IRMEP’s U.S. damage assessment score is a solid “5 out of 5.”

16
d. Economic Reform
Israel’s economic reform is a matter which has little direct affect on U.S. interests.
Although Israelis would like to further integrate economies, particularly in the military
industrial arena, the U.S. frequently finds that this leads to unintended technology
transfers. Israel’s attempted sales of radar systems based on U.S. AWACs and the Lavi
fighter jet copied from the U.S. F-16 platforms are strategically significant, damaging
matters.
The continued dependence of Israel on U.S. aid is a negative factor for the United
States. The IRMEP damage score to U.S. interests is material. Ballooning levels
of aid to Israel, while insubstantial as a percentage of total U.S. GDP, alienates the
global community and Arab states since it is the highest single U.S.
disbursement, at extremely favorable terms (equivalent to cash), in the entire U.S.
foreign aid budget.
This is not good for Israel and in spite of the boon to U.S. arms manufacturers and
defense contractor interests written into aid packages, it is negative for the U.S.
IRMEP’s U.S. damage assessment score is 2 out of 5.

e. Rejuvenation of Zionism
Supporting the rejuvenation of Zionism has had a polarizing effect within the United
States and damaged the constitutionally protected freedoms of U.S. citizens. As a case
study, consider how two ideologically and religiously motivated soldiers
departing for different destination countries are now treated by the U.S.
government.
An ardent and fit Jewish youth with American citizenship can easily travel to Israel and
serve in the Israeli Defense Force, or other government branch, for two years, and return
to blend back into U.S. society. His or her activities, pledges of allegiance (which nullify
U.S. citizenship), and details of military service are of no interest to the U.S. government.
He could engage in two years of paramilitary operations against U.S. Arab allies. The
soldier could return to the U.S. with an ongoing intelligence liaison to Mossad. None of
this will be questioned or investigated in the U.S.
An ardent and fit Palestinian youth with American citizenship departing for the West
Bank faces different treatment. If he is of the minority of ardently religious Muslim
Palestinians he faces the wrath of both Israel and the U.S. He can be detained and
imprisoned in Israel if authorities suspect any sympathy or support for Palestinian
causes. Pleas to the U.S. counsel in Tel Aviv will lead neither to support nor presence of
U.S. representation if the detainment ever reaches a judicial forum, which it may not.
If the Palestinian youth joins any group considered to be a militant opposition to Israel
(though usually not the United States), he will deeply implicate himself immediately for
the crime of association with “terrorist” organizations, subject to detainment as an enemy
combatant in Guantanamo Bay, or even execution by U.S. intelligence operatives.
Militant opposition to Israel has been completely criminalized in the United States. And
Israel itself publicly reserves the right to assassinate American citizens, in the United
States, suspected of acting against the interests of Israel.

17
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

As a party to the promotion of Zionist over other religiously motivated military

activities, the U.S. has subtly codified military and other support of religion in a
way that strikes at the very foundations of the reasons for which the nation was
formed.
By selectively codifying support for Zionism, the U.S. sets itself upon the course
of intolerance and wide scale bloodshed. The damage to its reputation as a just,
fair, and secular nation has been pre-empted by coalitions of evangelical interest
groups and agents of Israel. IRMEP’s U.S. damage assessment score is 4 out of 5.
Practically speaking, U.S. policies are becoming indistinguishable from an
institutionalized modern crusade against Islam and Arab nations.

18
IV. Conclusions

That ACB has realized high levels of implementation is undeniable. However, IRMEP
believes that the costs in terms of damage done to U.S. foreign policy objectives and
national interests are extremely high.

Exhibit #6
“Clean Break” Policy Implementation vs. U.S. Damage Assessment Score
Card
(IRMEP 2003)

Increase U.S. Congressional

Support

“ Peace for Peace” Palestinian

Strategy

Contain, Destabilize and Roll

Back Regional Challengers Success
Damage

Domestic Economic Reform

Rejuvenation of Zionism

-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
High Damage - High Implementation

Though some damage may even be irreparable, IRMEP calls for U.S. policy makers to
immediately reconsider of the costs of further ACB implementation. Following ACB
can only generate additional damage to U.S. interests in the future.

Further Reading
“Occupied Iraq: the Birth of Greater Israel,” IRMEP Policy Brief, February 2, 2003.

“Nurturing The Tendrils Of Arab Democracy,” IRMEP Policy Research Note, January 30, 2003.

“U.S. Aid to Israel: Severing the Roots of Conflict,” IRMEP Policy Brief, January 10, 2003.

“Remove the Wedge? Yes!,” IRMEP Policy Analysis, December 17, 2002.

“The U.S. Middle East Partnership Initiative,” IRMEP Policy Research Note, December 13, 2002.

“Engagement Not Xenophobia,” IRMEP Policy Analysis, November 1, 2002.

19
Middle East Foreign Policy Analysis

Support The Institute For Research: Middle Eastern Policy

Is it time for you to join with IRMEP in seeing America's values and interests reflected in U.S.
foreign policies? Are you are disillusioned by endless wars, misguided foreign aid and chronic
underdevelopment causing terrorism to emanate from the Middle East? Do you sense a
dangerous influence of Israeli directed political action committees (PACs) on the U.S.
government? If you do, I invite you to become a member of one of the fastest growing foreign
policy organizations in America!
September 11, 2001 Put Middle East Foreign Policy on the Map
Your tax deductible contribution today will ensure the continuation of IRMEP’s mission to see a
constructive and balanced American foreign policy in the Middle East that develops freedom,
opportunity, prosperity and civil society in the region while protecting the U.S. homeland. As the
events of September 11, 2001 proved, no American can now ignore the U.S. role in the Middle
East, or leave it to narrow-minded special interests and esoteric think tanks to dictate how U.S.
foreign aid is directed in the region. IRMEP provides research, analysis and recommendations
that, as Noam Chomsky put it is “adding some balance to the
hopelessly distorted picture that is crafted by the existing institutes.”

IRMEP Membership Levels

Congress Watch is $100 a year. In addition to basic membership
benefits, you receive a quarterly packet of The Institute for Research
Middle Eastern Policy Inc. key reports on Middle
East foreign policy
issues before Congress IRMEP Membership Services
President's Club is $500 a year. President's Club P.O. Box 32041
Members are invited one President's Club Meeting
a year. These Washington, DC based meetings
Washington, D.C. 20007
Fax: (202) 318-8009
serve as a great opportunity to meet other
Members from around the nation and talk to
IRMEP policy experts. In addition, Members are Membership in IRMEP is a tax deductible
charitable deduction to the extent allowable by
invited to attend regional events in their area.
Associates give $1,500 a year. Membership current law. Keep this stub for your records.
includes all President’s Club privileges, plus an Check #___________________Date___________
invitation to the annual Leadership Conference
and Board Meeting. Amount $_________________
Founders give $10,000 a year. Membership
includes all Associates benefits, plus invitations to private receptions and special events.

---------------------------------------Clip and Mail or Fax---------------------------------------

Membership Form
Name___________________________________ Email________________________________________
Company/Organization___________________________________
Address_______________________________________________________________________________
City___________________________________ State_______________ Zip_________________________
Phone #1___________________________________ Phone #2___________________________________

Please enroll me in IRMEP for the membership category checked below.

[ ] Congress Watch Membership $100
[ ] Associates Membership $500
[ ] President’s Club $1,500
[ ] Founder’s Annual Membership $10,000
Payment by: Check [ ] Visa [ ] MasterCard [ ]
Credit Card #___________________________________
Expiration Date_________________________________
Signature______________________________________

20
This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.daneprairie.com.
The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only.